Who built this place?

[MajorTom]

I was defending a base today and one resounding question kept repeating in my mind.



As I made attempts to defend the base, it was like a blow by blow summarry of why the Auraxis engineers should all be gathered together and pushed of a cliff.

I am a sniper, so I gear up and head for the roof to thin out the crowd streaming from the nearby tower to our base. I step outside the door and receive a bolt in the head, about a half a second later, another and I am dead. The next time I go roof-side I approach mre cautiously and get a look around first. The base is surrounded by cliffs higher then the walls of the base! They where battle cresting the hill (meaning they where poking just their heads above the hills) and had a better possition on me then I had on them! This is absurd, I said to myself. But I didn't have much time to get annoyed as low flying reaver sent me back to the tubes.

So then I get the idea in my head that I will brave the sniper rounds and try to get our turrets up and running to deal with the enemy aircraft, quite a big mistake. Those turrets are pretty much useless. They are always down the entire length of fights.

Ok then, forget it, I said, I am gonna get assault their tower. Once again, big mistake. The towers are about 18x harder to assault then the bases!

This is when I just gave up and joined up with an attack squad on another continent.

Know this is no news flash to me, I have always known the bases where the hardest thing to defend, but for some reason it just got on my nerves an extra amount today.

Have the devs said anything about changing the location/layouts of bases? Putting bases in the middle of box valleys may work for Halo, but this stuff really needs to go.

Here is how I have the bases immagined:
*In a strategic location, like a hill or overlooking a major bridge or something.
*Whith one entrance into the courtyard
*All base entrances are within the courtyard so that the enemy must take the courtyard in order to even get a crack at taking the base
*Few if any superfluous entrances.
*Few if any Roof Top entrances
*Phalanx turretts in more advantagious spots, maybe more of them.
*Sheilding over the Phalanx turrets that regenerates over time, both adding another layer of turret protection and also allowing for engineers to come back after the turret has destroyed, but the sheilding is back up, and repair the turret. Soldiers would be unnable to fire inside the phalanx sheilds, but the phalanx could fire out.
*Blast doors or maybe longer hack times on the doors to sensitive areas, like the CC or gen or spawn room.
*AA guns in the courtyard with a limited upward facing range. In the courtyard so that they aren't as prone to enemy fire and with a limitted range so that it is a deffencsive measure to discourage bombers and the like, but not keep all enemy planes out of the SOI.

Heck, if the devs don't want to go through all the work, they could just put the base CC in a tower and put the tower in the middle of the base...

[ChewyLSB]

Yeah, I have to agree with that. Whoever designed the bases needs to learn how base defense works. This game has the second worst designed bases in a game I've ever seen (the Blood Gulch bases in Halo take first)

[Keebler]

Those count?

Ok. say we implement your plan that basically creates one choke point to get in the CY. If your in your attack force, and your forced through a doorway to see all the base defender's CE, tanks, MAXes, etc. waiting for you, you would not appreciate that.

The key to defending a base is defending the basic doors. The BD is easy to cover with maels and SA. the front requires CE and most of your forces. A few skygaurds are needed, as well as some people doing DL sweeps of important areas, and a few watching the roof, and you can hold off a yellow (so used to saying large) force for quite a bit until enemys come or they wise up and roll armor.

[MajorTom]

Those count?

Ok. say we implement your plan that basically creates one choke point to get in the CY. If your in your attack force, and your forced through a doorway to see all the base defender's CE, tanks, MAXes, etc. waiting for you, you would not appreciate that.

The key to defending a base is defending the basic doors. The BD is easy to cover with maels and SA. the front requires CE and most of your forces. A few skygaurds are needed, as well as some people doing DL sweeps of important areas, and a few watching the roof, and you can hold off a yellow (so used to saying large) force for quite a bit until enemys come or they wise up and roll armor.
So you think the base desing is ok as it stands?

Look, I know if all my ideas where implemented it would make it damn near impossible to attack, but you have to agree it is damn near impossible to defend as it stands now. The bases at least need to be put in advantageous positions, instead of in big holes surrounded by cliffs and the like.

Bassically I just want to make it so that defenders are at least on equal ground with attackers, and not at a disadvantage. I think everyone can agree with me on that...

[Keebler]

Most people dont like stalemates. I know I dont like trying to get the same base for an hour, it gets boring and fustrating. Defence is fun, if you have the right tools and mindset. Patience is key.

[BUGGER]

bases are ok, all you got to do is take away the enemys spawn points and its all down hill. If that isn't possible to reach from inside the base, remember this is an outside world/spawntube.

[MajorTom]

bases are ok, all you got to do is take away the enemys spawn points and its all down hill. If that isn't possible to reach from inside the base, remember this is an outside world/spawntube.
I undestand that the way to win any conflict in this game is to deprive the enemy of their spawn points. The only problem is that there are 3 ways to go about robbing a defenders spawn point:
1.) Blow the gen
2.) Blow the spawn tubes
3.) Hack the CC

And only one way to stop the attackers spawn:
1.) Hack the tower

Ask anybody, it is alot easier to accomplish one of the things on the first list then to accomplish the second. Towers, assuming roughly equal force and numbers, are much Much MUCH easier to defend then bases. This makes the attack/defend scale slanted towards the attacker.

But all of this is rather abstract. When you get right down to it, this game requires a significantly larger number of defenders to stop an assault. Now with equal numbers you will be able to slow the assault quite a deal, but it will not be stopped.

Liek I said before, the ground ought to at least be equal, so that the assaulter will either need larger numbers or better tactics in order to take a base, not the other way around.

As I have already said, all of my ideas implemented at once would be to realistic and not fun enough, but bases ought to at least be in easy to defend locations, like hill, or even backed up to impassable mountains or something, ANYTHING!

[BUGGER]

For some reason i think blowing the gen should leave the spawn tubes up.

I dont care, I dont want to argue either. Would you be glad to die every single time you attack a base? Most times bases are attacked by more people than what you got. can't help it. Really, the attackers respond with zergs. A monster with so many legs he just flops them around hoping to squish something (yes, very korny). Beating a zerg is something you can never do. Up a defensive base to hold a zerg will make it impossible to capture a base with just a platoon.

[Davik Dakari]

I may not have played 1 min of this game YET (I will soon, once my Win Professional arrives) but reading this just appalled me. Bases in valleys??? that has to be the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard, if Patton heard that he would roll over in his grave. I'm going into the military straight after I graduate college but with the training I have already recieved from ROTC I know that has to be the biggest no no in strategic base planning. Are these dev's related to Gen. Burnsides (one of the worst strategists in history)? The purpose of a base is to be able to hold off superior numbers for long durations of time until reinforcements arrive. I know what MajorTom said would make base capturing harder but I have seen videos on PSMovies and base caps are a cakewalk. I think more stalemates would make the game a whole lot more entertaining than just running in and cap'ing in <10 minutes. What I do know about how spawning takes place in this game would have to change though.

Sorry if I mispelled, or if my thoughts are out of order but it is late.

[MajorTom]

For some reason i think blowing the gen should leave the spawn tubes up.

I dont care, I dont want to argue either. Would you be glad to die every single time you attack a base? Most times bases are attacked by more people than what you got. can't help it. Really, the attackers respond with zergs. A monster with so many legs he just flops them around hoping to squish something (yes, very korny). Beating a zerg is something you can never do. Up a defensive base to hold a zerg will make it impossible to capture a base with just a platoon.
I guess I can see that, but the fact is that it isn't even equall yet. Before anybody talks about allowing bases to defend greater forces of people we first have to make it so that if I have a platton defending vs your plattoon attacking (assuming equall skill and all that rubbish) that it will be an equall fight.

Something is wrong when defenders have a horrible a strategic possition, many more entrances then they need, and just gennerally worse defence then the attackers!

There is only a handfull of bases I will even try to defend anymore. Tired of walking out the door and getting death rained down on me from the freakin hills.

But, they designed it like that for a reason so I guess this is how they wanted it. I guess getting it balanced was to hard for them and having the attacker constantly win is more "fun" then the defender constantly winning...

[Eldanesh]

1: Unless completely outnumbered or outmanuvered, base defenders can hold almost indefinatly.

2: Stalemates really do suck.

3: Bases with inpenetable defenses would really suck. (almost as much as trying to take a capital with the shield up)

Honestly, its not so much the ground that makes defending hard, base placement imo is not as important as lattice.

Its also supposed to be a game. And are you kidding about defenders never winning? base hacks are not always a cakewalk, be it spending hours trying to take one base, or defending against resecures.

I have also yet to see any bases in valleys, there are some near cliffs and mountains, however the amount of difference snipers make while camping a high spot is next to nothing.

[Vis Armata]

Defense is about picking and choosing your battles.

If a defending force can make it to the vehicle pads, they must deploy CE, heavy vehicles and aircraft to control the SOI and everything in it - AMSes, streams of infantry from towers, airspace, etc. If a defending force loses effective control of an SOI, outside defense is finished. Teams should then deploy to doorways and interior chokepoints, if holding the base is still a good idea.

The bases could use some tweaking (better turrets, some form of base control panel, a few more IFF doorways), but at the same time they are not necessarily indefensible.

[Paragon]

I love defending Bases, because that means i get lots of kills. I always organize a squad, and we always set out and hide somewhere away from the base if we know that there is an assault coming. Then we send a scout out, most of the time a sniper, who then tells us when most of the enemy is gathered around our base, and that their backs are towards us. Then we strike. I have ranked up thousands of exp points this way. Awesome strategy. That is all it takes to mess up the assault. Then once you have decimated half of the unexpecting attackers, the defenders come and clean it up.

I love BD

[FatalLight]

Well bein a VS on markov I am almost always defending and it is not that hard. Just this morning 30% defended against 50% NC and 20% Tr for like 2-3 hours and we won, we got the tower and moved on (after we moved on NC bak haked the base n got it but thats past the point).

I really dont have a problem with the bases except for the turrets, ya they suk, dont do too much damage and get destroyed with 2 decimators. Backdoor... who came up with that! Should move that inside the cy like where the stairs to the wall are. But ya bds are pretty easy to defend its just the concept of the thing...

[martyr]

according to the anniversary ATD, new bases are on the way.

[Onizuka-GTO]

yay for new bases. :)

[Paragon]

Hey Major Tom do you play halo? Sorry for this if you call it spam. My name is =AF=Paragon in halo. I think i played with you guys today

[Paragon]

according to the anniversary ATD, new bases are on the way.
2x post...

Yay new bases are needed. I cant wait. Any idea what they are going to look like?

[ZionsFire]

Lashers+hallway=defenders win!

[Doppler]

according to the anniversary ATD, new bases are on the way.

I have been personnaly promised some help for defenders on at least two occasions, no less then 8 months ago in correspondance with the developers.. Defense has sucked since the get go. Anyone who thinks a defending force can hold out against and even equaly sized attacking force is dilluding themsleves. Defenders have as the man said, three points to loose, unless they have the biol; lab they gain no real benefit spawn wise for being at the base. I could take a preeschool class, give them snow, and they'd come up with a more defensable fort then bases in this game. Dont give me this "Well if the defenders manage to hold X and X and CE all the hell and gone and the attackers have nothing but trained attack midgets with no emp strike they can hold against a force half their size.

[Baneblade]

For balance, all I would do is put IFF locks on every door.

[Onizuka-GTO]

For balance, all I would do is put IFF locks on every door.

isn't that there already?

[FatalLight]

No only on the main ones like the front door, back door, spawn, and gen rooms all others are walk through.

[Paragon]

no they arent, right? I wouldnt know. I spend all of my time in a reaver or mosquito

[Baneblade]

isn't that there already?
Nope, but if the door bug is still there that is almost better...

[Onizuka-GTO]

oh i see, i didn't see the word "every" but yes that would be interesting, not to mention extremely frustrating for invading forces.
and will give defenders extra time, and not to mention it will discourage gun-ho one-man-army Maxes storming around.... :rolleyes:

[TheN00b]

Indeed, Onizuka, I hate to see us doing very well on defense, only to have a bunch of goddamn 'Cong MAXes charge through our backdoor with shields on and charge straight into the spawn. So lame. On another note, when I get home today, I'll scan the drawing of different base layouts that I've been working on onto my computer and post them here.

[Red October]

Dumb Question of the day:

Now if we include the "Lore" of Planetside, were the bases set up before or after the start of the war?

And were they "bases" to begien with?

Reason being, they all seem like converted research facilities to me. If thats true, then research facilities are placed where it makes sense to do research (such as the whole lot in the Searhus Caldera). In which case, your very lucky to have a "base" in a good strategic position. Plus having more than one entrance, crappy position on some of the turrents (couldn't believe when I hopped into one day, I had a perfect view of the tree's...and not much else), only a few locks, etc. makes perfect sense as well. They weren't designed as fortified Military Installations, besides, when everyone was one big happy family under the TR, there was no severe need to think about defense.

[Onizuka-GTO]

But the TR's weren't naiive, they were a police state. Paranoided with security. So the bases would have so sort of fortification just for defence purposes.
Though it does make sense they were then upgrade when they fractured.

[TheN00b]

Yeah, you'd think that after over a year of warfare, there'd have been some sort of upgrades to bases to make them more heavily fortified and more strategically located.

[Desperado]

I know of a bug that let's you open a locked door without actually hacking it, I use it when I'm in a max :)

[jsloan31]

My theory was that the bases were unarmed, and undefended, and not meant for military work. However, when the Vanu Sovereignty formed, and soon after, the New Conglomerate, the bases were outfitted with turrets, and IFF locks. Soon after, the faction system was designed, and implemented, and this leads to the current Hack and Hold bases.

So, it's kinda like the theory on page 2 :p.

[Toneball]

I know of a bug that let's you open a locked door without actually hacking it, I use it when I'm in a max :)

That's a great idea, let everyone know you exploit. Not dawging you, just, personally, I'd keep things like that a secret. Now, back on topic. I think the way the bases are built is very in line with the story. Not all the facilities in PS we designed as military compounds, but sientific research centers. And once the war broke out, everything was turned into a makeshift military base. Maybe it's just me but that's why I think the bases are designed as such.

[jsloan31]

That's a great idea, let everyone know you exploit. Not dawging you, just, personally, I'd keep things like that a secret. Now, back on topic. I think the way the bases are built is very in line with the story. Not all the facilities in PS we designed as military compounds, but sientific research centers. And once the war broke out, everything was turned into a makeshift military base. Maybe it's just me but that's why I think the bases are designed as such.

sounds like my theory, too xD.

[MajorTom]

My theory was that the bases were unarmed, and undefended, and not meant for military work. However, when the Vanu Sovereignty formed, and soon after, the New Conglomerate, the bases were outfitted with turrets, and IFF locks. Soon after, the faction system was designed, and implemented, and this leads to the current Hack and Hold bases.

So, it's kinda like the theory on page 2 :p.
Well, I honestly don't care too much if the poor base defence jives with the story, because this isn't a story driven game, it is a gameplay oriented game, and most people will agree the defence part of this game is not very fun gameplay.

And to all of you people saying you tips and hints for holding bases, I understand it is possible. But you and your defending squad has to be so much more on the ball then the attackers to hold them off.

[Onizuka-GTO]

I suppose in planetside case, attack is definately the best form of defence since it's so hard to defend bases anyway.... :rolleyes:

[Baneblade]

I suppose in planetside case, attack is definately the best form of defence since it's so hard to defend bases anyway.... :rolleyes:
I still love HARTing to Esamir and capping Nott and setting up CE traps...I have been able to hold off up to a full squad alone...

Defense is only hard in big battles where numbers tends to make more difference than tactics...

[Doppler]

[QUOTE=MajorTom]Well, I honestly don't care too much if the poor base defence jives with the story, because this isn't a story driven game, it is a gameplay oriented game, and most people will agree the defence part of this game is not very fun gameplay. [QUOTE]

See thats the problem, defending could be fun, but it needs some serious logical fucking improvements to make it work, otherwise it's just kinda holding bakc the inevitable instad of holding a port in a storm.

[Ait'al]

The bases werent designed on ease of defense. They were designed on different ways of defense and different situations in battle. In this case getting off your ass and keeping vehicles going in a purposly harder situation for ground troops. If your talking about where im thinking.

There are several bases with this concept in mind. One totally dedicated to it as far as i can tell. Others emphasize, or use it, probably since it was easier to repeat the exaxt method to get what amount of that concept they wanted you to realize when you defended it. Hell its a we need vehicles to survive situation with them haveing a better option of troops to attack. You should be thankfull.

And besides that the arrogant tr made it, so you get the idea. :P~

They thought damn is this veiw nice, or, this spot cosey. And thought, we'll never be attacked by all these people we whip into submission everyday. NOOO, why the hell would they do that. They love us!!!

[Incompetent]

See thats the problem, defending could be fun, but it needs some serious logical fucking improvements to make it work, otherwise it's just kinda holding bakc the inevitable instad of holding a port in a storm.Exactly, defense sucks because its literally impossible to win. It doesn't matter how many of them you manage to mow down at the doors, because only the defenders have to deal with attrition, in this case NTUs. Once the attackers have the defense bottled up, theres almost no way to get out of it.

[Doppler]

Exactly, defense sucks because its literally impossible to win. It doesn't matter how many of them you manage to mow down at the doors, because only the defenders have to deal with attrition, in this case NTUs. Once the attackers have the defense bottled up, theres almost no way to get out of it.

NTU"s are not nearly as big a problem as they used to be, the used to make defending impossible, now they just make it a nuscance. But yes the core problem remains the same, defenders have to deal with three points of failure in bases, one of which is usualy on the roof and must be reached by an uncovered walkway.


I whould even be all about increasing NTU consumption to activate features on the base to aid defenders, maybe the ability to get base shields reguardless of module (come on its a fucking portcullis how hard to grasp is that) Or some reliable AA for the base. I honestly think aircraft is the biggest damn bane to sucessfullb ase defense, between the slow trackign of the turrets, their lack of damage, and their upper radius being clipped, not to mention how bad their grouping gets at range while reavers and such can still rocket spam them to oblivion.

And i know the arguments some of you guys are gonna make, brainwashed intoy our 'i am leetz pilot skeelz i should have free fly" your going to say defenders should have to additionaly use AA max's and skyguards, and i agree up to a point, but in base conditions skyguards and AA max's should be suplimentary, not a necissity, especialy given how a base inherantly cuts off lrge hemispheres of their field of fire.

And another thing Ait: you wernt playing back when NTU consuption worked off number of spawns in base SOI (explain that one to me someone) so you cant tell me that the designers had any ryme or reason to their "trying to make defense a fresh challenge" other then 'lets completely fuck over defenders as we want to appeal to all the quake aholics"

[Baneblade]

Defense would be more reasonable if that ridiculous backdoor was at least only openable from inside, there was at least a Phalanx turret in all the logical spots, and if the generator wasnt so easy to disable...

Personally I dont think it should be impossible to take a base though, people do get tired of fighting in the same place...I think...=/

[Spee]

haha, I remember the days of when spawning took NTU's. The day after the patch, me and my IV guys started the Gen Blowing thing in order to deprive them of thier spawns, considering attrition now would take, literally, hours on end.


We got so many hate /tells it made our heads spin :p

[Indecisive]

Which is why I think the force domes on every base would have been r33t.

[MajorTom]

Defense would be more reasonable if that ridiculous backdoor was at least only openable from inside, there was at least a Phalanx turret in all the logical spots, and if the generator wasnt so easy to disable...

Personally I dont think it should be impossible to take a base though, people do get tired of fighting in the same place...I think...=/
Thats a great idea, if the backdoor was only able to be opened from the inside that would accomplish 2 things that need to be done:
1.) Provide for one less base entrance to protect
2.) Give one more thing for infiltrators to do to help their squad and whatnot.

It would also encourage more small scale tactics. If an infiltrator holds the door open for him and his squad they can do lot of damage if they are comming from a direction that is unexpected.

[FatalLight]

HeHe good new tactics, I like new tactics :)